2. The costs of lawsuit shall be borne by the Plaintiff.

A. On September 8, 2015, the Plaintiff entered into a lease agreement with the Defendant and the Plaintiff by setting the lease deposit amount of KRW 100,000,000 monthly rent, and from September 8, 2015 to September 8, 2017, with respect to the lease deposit amount of KRW 100,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,0000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,

B. The Defendant, upon delivery from the Plaintiff, operated the instant commercial building, agreed on the said lease around February 2017, and transferred the said commercial building to the Plaintiff around that time.

【Ground of recognition】 The fact that there has been no dispute, entry of Gap Nos. 1 and 9 (including virtual numbers; hereinafter the same shall apply), the purport of the whole pleadings

2. The assertion and judgment

A. The gist of the Plaintiff’s assertion 1) The Defendant: (a) operated a F cafeteria with the name of the title holder in his/her business registration title; (b) changed the name of the title holder to the Defendant; and (c) operated the cafeteria again; (d) on April 2015, 2015, the construction of the instant shopping mall was conducted at the bottom of the underground floor of the instant building; and (c) when the air conditioners began to sell air conditioners, a large amount of water was generated. However, since the Defendant’s use as the above shopping mall was not flooded, it was a place where the construction was not originally built; and (d) the Defendant failed to construct the said site as a main place, and thus, the Defendant was obliged to preserve it with the care of a good manager until the leased object was returned; and (e) the Defendant, in violation of such duty of care, damaged the instant shopping mall and the underground portion of the leased object, which was the object leased, and thereby, damaged the cost of removal of the leased object or tort (i.e.